By "relegating Ireland to a region of another country" you mean wishing Northern Ireland or, for that matter, Ireland, to be a part of the UK or, in short, being a unionist. That is a political view. Hence it is your position that a person can be "more" or "less" Irish than another on account of his or her political views. That is repugnant.Originally Posted by lopez
Yes, we know that [sigh].
As you know, ROI citizenship is known as "Irish citizenship". That does not, however, mean that it is not ROI citizenship. There is no all-Ireland state, therefore there can be no all-Ireland citizenship.
And? The two aren't mutually exclusive! You're revealing an incredibly simplistic understanding of identity.
So why are you discussing identity?
I have never told anyone who has a passport of a country that he is not a citizen of that country - this is the charge you made against me and you have failed to back it up.
On granny-rulers, I merely observed that they had less connection to the ROI than those born and bred there. That doesn't mean they weren't ROI citizens.
There is doubtless much truth in that.
Incidentally, when you count all the people with Irish grannies, the population of ROI becomes much more than 1/19th. You can't have it both ways!
If one country only picks someone born there or with a father from there, and another country picks anyone born there, with a father or mother from there, or with a grandfather or grandmother from there, how is it "taking the ****" to say that the former's eligibility criteria are tighter than the latter's?
Er, those criteria were not in place at the time under discussion. No-one is claiming that NI doesn't avail of looser criteria now than in the recent past!
I have never disagreed - on the contrary it is those who claim Ireland equates to the ROI who disagreed. I have been arguing the opposite.Glad you finally agree!
Is there not a contradiction here? If you are saying that Ireland should only be used in the context of the island then how can one be both British and Irish given that Britain is a sepearte island and should therefore, by your logic be viewed as a separate entity. No part of Ireland has ever been part of Britain, North, South, East or West since at least the last ice age and even then was just part of the mass of mainland Europe....
No time deadline was made public afaik.
The next FIFA Executive Board meeting is in the middle of December in Japan.
I could imagine that they will only have something to decide upon if the Legal Board (a standing committee) submit recommendations that require their approval.
Great Britain is, indeed, a separate island. And I agree that "Britain" or "Great Britain" should not be used to include Ireland or Northern Ireland. I see no contradiction!
It has, though, been part of the British Isles, and part of the United Kingdom.
I love those 'mad' smilies you keep putting upBy "relegating Ireland to a region of another country" you mean wishing Northern Ireland or, for that matter, Ireland, to be a part of the UK or, in short, being a unionist. That is a political view. Hence it is your position that a person can be "more" or "less" Irish than another on account of his or her political views. That is repugnant.
There is an all-Ireland availability to Irish citizenship, and the reason there is no all-Ireland state has nothing to do with the democratic wish of the people upon partition. As someone has already stated, 'we don't want to go there.'
I didn't say that being British and Irish are mutually exclusive of each other. What I said is, if you reduce one country to a region of the other, you relegate what could be termed a co-nationality to a regionality. It might offend you, but sad as it may appear, it's the truth.
You brought it up with the 'granny rule' and some English person with a granny claiming to be Irish and his identity crisis. Before that we were talking about citizenship being a requirement to play for Ireland. It is pretty pathetic from someone who claims to be Northern Irish, Irish and British all in one, and no doubt like all Ulster Unionists, wheels whatever one out at their convenience (today it's Irish just to win an argument on an internet forum), to criticise others.
To quote you: '...the Charlton team in the popular consciousness was a team of English and Scotsmen with tenuous links to Ireland. That wasn't far off being accurate. (Note this was never the case in the 70s or before when the ROI had wonderful teams of genuine Irishmen like Brady, Stapleton, Giles, etc.)...There were a lot of granny rulers and the majority of the team was made up of players from England and Scotland...I find it strange that someone with 3 English grandparents and 1 Irish grandparent would consider himself "100% Irish" and have no affinity with Britain. Such a person must be very poor at arithmetic or have some kind of identity crisis.'
You said a bit more than that, and you know you did. You were reiterating well worn tabloid soundbites and going on about 'popular conciousness'. All very good until 'popular consciousness' also feels that NI fans are a bunch of religious bigots who boo their own players simply because of their religion. I don't believe it, before you throw another mad smilie at me, but Marie Jones - a Protestant (you mentioned the polarity of religion and nationalism in the 6C, no?) -believed it enough to bring out a play which is on another tour round Britain with Patrick Kielty as our hero.
When you count all the English 'grannies', colonials, Owen Hargreaves and Zola f*cking Budds then what does that make the British population. No you can't have it both ways, even though you seem to want it one way - pick players with no connection with Northern Ireland while preventing Irish citizens playing for their country.
You're taking the p*ss by stating NI eligibility criteria is stricter than the Republic's. You lost that moral highground, not when you started choosing the grannies, but when you started picking players with no ancestral or residential connection to the 6C.
Oh the time lord returns? When we talk about Lennon and being booed, it's in the past. When we talk about NI not picking the 'grannies', that's OK we can talk about the past then.
The ROI as you describe it is Ireland.
This is the cooooooooooooolest footy forum I've ever seen!
Oh now we have that old chestnut: The fact that the two islands stand beside each other must make them part of a greater entity, named after the big one of course. You're statement sounds as irrendentist as saying the 6C and the independent state are one country.
This is the cooooooooooooolest footy forum I've ever seen!
It's not political views that makes them less Irish. It's relegating Ireland to a region of another country, and opting for citizenship of another country that does
Only part of Ireland is 'relegated' within another country with separate nationality. In no reasonable way does this make us less Irish. I don't really see where you can go with this one, Lopez?
you are 100% Irish but consider yourself British
I consider myself 100% both. What's da problem? It's entirely reasonable and logical.
People didn't take 'the Charlton team' seriously due to ignorance and jealousy
Broadly agreed, although don't assume all the jealous were ignorant. They played to their strengths, sometimes it wasn't pretty (not entirely different to the current NI team)
Yeah, One! The other area in the North east of Ireland is currently a region of Britain, which just happens to have a team playing international football
It's just happened since the 19th century. (or sometime between the late 12th and early 17th century, if ye mean its current regional status...
Your love or otherwise doesn't diminish the ugly chauvinism revealed by your comments.
An "all-Ireland availability" to ROI citizenship.
Nonsense. A Scot is no less a Scot because Scotland is in the UK. An Englishman no less an Englishman, etc.
I believe we were talking about identity before that. I only referred to 'identity crisis' because you - or someone else - had unfairly introduced the idea.
Your comments indicate that you have a problem with anyone who doesn't conform to your simplistic and binary understanding of identity. I think it would be more reasonable to conclude that your limited understanding, and not my identity, is "pathetic".
And? In none of those quotes did I tell anyone who has a passport of a country that he is not a citizen of that country! Please stop making things up.
I think it is true that in the popular consciousness until recently, that is how NI fans were viewed. I think that has changed, though.
Strange question. The British population is the British population - made up of all who live there.
I don't think NI should pick players with no connection to NI. And, if you accept that you can't have it both ways, then you can't claim a figure of 1/19th of the population.
Why are you deliberately misrepresenting what I say? Your behaviour indicates that you are struggling to engage in a rational discussion. I said the NI eligibility was stricter than the Republic's. That is a fact.
I have never said that we are on the moral high ground.
If we're talking about the 80s and 90s, then we're talking about the 80s and 90s. If we're talking about the time Lennon got booed, then we're talking about the time Lennon got booed. If we're talking about now, then we're not talking about the 80s and 90s. If we're talking about now, then we're not talking about the time Lennon got booed. I see no difficulty in being able to distinguish between time when discussing various issues.
No. When I refer to ROI I only refer to the 26 counties. When I say Ireland, I mean ... well, Ireland (all 32 counties).
Last edited by Blanchflower; 20/11/2007 at 1:22 PM.
You deny that Great Britain, Ireland and neighbouring isles were known as the British Isles? You deny that Great Britain and Ireland were once part of a "greater entity" (i.e. the UK of GB & Ireland)?
Last edited by Blanchflower; 20/11/2007 at 1:25 PM.
Its hard to understand you being 100% of two nationalities. Here is a question that might help to figure out how 'Irish' you are? Would you consider that the Irish language is an important part of an Irish person's cultural heritage and should be on an equal footing with the English language by anyone who claims to be 100% Irish? Note: I don't mean that you need to be able to speak Irish to be 100% Irish - just respect those Irish people who feel it is important to Irish culture and not object to signposts in both languages etc. that type of thing.
What do you think the reaction at Windsor if a verse of GSTQ was sung in Irish? (only a verse and could be put up phenetically on a screen - it has been done elsewhere!)
Maybe this doesn't apply in this case but the basis for believing he is british and Irish maybe down to his belief in the regional aspect of Britain. He doesn't have to be an Irish nationalist to be Irish
To put it another way it would be a man from Cork being a Munsterman and an Irishman. To many ulstermen its the same thing.
others of course get two passports as it suits them
54,321 sold - wws will never die - ***
---
New blog if anyone's interested - http://loihistory.wordpress.com/
LOI section on balls.ie - http://balls.ie/league-of-ireland/
It's only hard if you think they are mutually exclusive. Is a Scotsman less than 100% Scottish because he is also British? Is a Fleming less than 100% Flemish because he is also Dutch?
Now you're also at this chauvinistic and nasty game of trying to place people on a scale of Irishness dependent on their political views. Frankly, that is quite a repugnant game.
I agree with you there and I have no problem understanding that.Maybe this doesn't apply in this case but the basis for believing he is british and Irish maybe down to his belief in the regional aspect of Britain. He doesn't have to be an Irish nationalist to be Irish.
To put it another way it would be a man from Cork being a Munsterman and an Irishman. To many ulstermen its the same thing.
others of course get two passports as it suits them
The Munsterman identity down here only applies when following the Munster Rugby team. I've never heard of Roy Keane being referred to as a Munsterman!
Thanks Janey. But I already know how Irish I am, ie 100% as I said.
No, not necessarily. I didn't learn or speak any Irish until I left school and lived in Dublin as a student. I picked up some, although none of my friends then spoke much more, bar one guy from the Donegal Gaeltacht and a couple of traineee primary teachers. That lessened the interest in me learning much more.Would you consider that the Irish language is an important part of an Irish person's cultural heritage
That said, I fully support the teaching and use of the Irish language and am pleased that it has consolidated north, south and beyond Ireland. On a slight tangent, while in Caerdydd the other day I was equally pleased to hear locals of all ages speaking in Welsh. And I even had time for some inane pidgin-Spanish banter with Lopez
Bemusement. Unless we were playing Liechtenstein, obviously. Most would assume it was German.What do you think the reaction at Windsor if a verse of GSTQ was sung in Irish? (only a verse and could be put up phenetically on a screen - it has been done elsewhere!)
Scotland is in Britain. Northern Ireland is not as you've already agreed.
And frankly his comment about the Irish language was purely cultural and not in the least political, it's your response that's repugnant and quite surprising to me to be honest.
Only chauvinistic and nasty if you can't answer the question. Personally, I'm no Irish language fanatic and barely speak it, but I do respect the fact that it is an important aspect of Irish cultural heritage.
Which may be more apt given the Queen's bloodline!
Your comments around the language are much appreciated and put Blanchflower to shame.
Yes merely asking a question about attitudes Irish culture and Irish language is chauvinistic, political and a repugnant game.
Blanchflower you were just dying with an intolerable itch to get all this stuff out of your system, given no provocation you go and create offence and invent slurs.
Your posts are cheap and nasty.
Originally Posted by lopez
"It is pretty pathetic from someone who claims to be Northern Irish, Irish and British all in one, and no doubt like all Ulster Unionists, wheels whatever one out at their convenience (today it's Irish just to win an argument on an internet forum), to criticise others"
You win, Lopez. You've dragged me far beyond rational debate, past irrational debate, even past anger, frustration and indeed outrage*.
Yep, whilst I greatly admire Blanchflower's stamina in keeping going, I've actually reached the stage where I'm bored by all this - something I never thought I'd hear myself say.
So I shall ignore entirely this endless bloody debate about Nationality, Identity, Citizenship etc and merely restate what I've come to believe as regards the footballing situation.
Namely, there are two Football Associations, and therefore two international football teams, in Ireland. Each is/should be equally valid and each should respect the other.
Consequently, playing for NI does not make someone either "more British" or "less Irish", it merely means that when someone pulls on the Emerald Green Shirt with the Celtic Cross Badge, he's a Northern Irish footballer - no more, no less. What he does away from the game is no business or interest of mine.
Therefore, I believe if you are born within one part of the island (NI), you should represent the IFA team and if you are born in the other part (Irish Republic), you should represent the other Association team, FAI/ROI (unless you have a suitable connection - parent/grandparent/residence - with another Association, when you may choose).
This is basically how it works for everyone of the other 208 Associations and minor, non-footballing quibbles over anthems, flags etc notwithstanding, I see no valid reason why it should not apply to the two Irish teams.
As for this interminable debate over nomenclature, in purely footballing terms, FIFA has determined that the FAI team must be called "Republic of Ireland" and the IFA team "Northern Ireland". And with this being a football website, it is both accurate and courteous to use those two terms - especially since the abbreviations "ROI" and "NI" are also by far the most convenient to type.
Of course, some will insist on typing "Ireland" when they mean "ROI", which is their prerogative, I suppose, but by the same token it is my prerogative to point out that when some of them also take exception to being called "ROI" at the same time as insisting on typing "the North" (or something longer or more provocative), then they are being hypocritical as well as petty (imo).
As for the name of the Nation/State/Country in which the FAI is located, people may call it just whatever the Hell they like - it won't make any difference to me.
* - By his contention that someone is more "truly" Irish for possessing Nationalist views than someone with, say, Unionist views, or by denying people the right to be both Irish and British, or by gratuitously ascribing an "identity crisis" to such people, I can only conclude that Lopez is desperate to compensate for the nagging fear that his having been born and brought up amongst all these Cockernees means that he is in reality somewhat less of an Irishman than those of us privileged and lucky enough to have been born and brought up in Ireland itself, in circumstances where we were free to choose our own identity, Nationality and politics, entirely as it suited us. Sad.
Last edited by EalingGreen; 20/11/2007 at 2:04 PM.
Tell you this for nothing the Scottish may say they are 100% scottish and some would say they are British also, but one thing is for sure they have their own national anthem unlike the the Winsdor faithful who have an anthem which is the same as England. What right thinking country has the same national athem as another country, IMO that is bloody stupid.
On the irish language chat, we should promote where possible the use of the language as it was restricted from this country by force many many moon's ago.
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks